Miriam Defensor Santiago » Speechhttp://miriam.com.ph/newsblog
The Official Website of Senator Miriam Defensor SantiagoWed, 22 Jul 2015 04:00:35 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.7CANCER MIRACLE PRAYER FOR MIRIAMhttp://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/2015/07/02/cancer-miracle-prayer-for-miriam/
http://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/2015/07/02/cancer-miracle-prayer-for-miriam/#commentsThu, 02 Jul 2015 03:51:24 +0000http://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/?p=2650St. Peregrine, you have been called “The Mighty,” “The Wonder Worker,” because of the numerous miracles which you obtained from God for those who have turned to you in their need.

You bore in your own flesh this cancerous disease that destroys the very fiber of our being. You turned to God when the power of human beings could do no more, and you were favored with the vision of Jesus coming down from His cross to heal your affliction.

I now ask God to heal Miriam and all cancer patients, whom I entrust to you. Aided by your powerful intercession, I shall sing with Mary in gratitude for God’s great goodness and mercy.

Amen.

]]>http://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/2015/07/02/cancer-miracle-prayer-for-miriam/feed/0SELF-LEADERSHIP AND EXCELLENCEhttp://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/2015/03/25/self-leadership-and-excellence/
http://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/2015/03/25/self-leadership-and-excellence/#commentsWed, 25 Mar 2015 05:00:28 +0000http://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/?p=2443By SENATOR MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO(Guest speaker of Maynilad water company at the leadership forum at the UP-Toyota GT Center on 25 March 2015.)

Definition of Self Leadership

The simple definition of self-leadership is: “The process by which you influence yourself to achieve your objectives.” In the 2012 book Self Leadership by Bryant and Kazan, this term is defined as: “Having a developed sense of who you are, what you can do, where you are going, coupled with the ability to influence your communication, emotions, and behaviour on the way to getting there.”

Thus, I will summarize the meaning of self-leadership as the modern equivalent of the famous command by Socrates: “Know thyself.”

If you want to examine yourself about self-leadership, the authorities require two skills. According to Bryant and Kazan, these are:

The first skill is to stop and step back from the things that trigger us to react; because when we react, we are being controlled by the trigger.

The second skill is to consider our intention, which involves our values and what we are trying to achieve, in order that we can live a life of choice.

Self-leadership, in other words, is coaching yourself. Ask yourself the following questions formulated by the authorities:

What is it you want to achieve?

What actions do you need to take to achieve this?

What are the results of your actions?

Is this feedback accurate?

Can I filter the feedback?

Self-Leadership Questionnaire

The 2002 International Journal of Leadership Studies published a shortened version of the Self Leadership Questionnaire, as follows:

Self-goal setting: I establish specific goals for my own performance.

Self-observation: I make a point to keep track of how well I’m doing at work.

Self-goal setting: I work toward specific goals I have set for myself.

Visualizing successful performance: I visualize myself successfully performing a task before I do it.

Visualizing performance: Sometimes I picture in my mind a successful performance before I actually do a task.

Self-reward: When I have successfully completed a task, I often reward myself with something I like.

Evaluating beliefs and assumptions: Sometimes I talk to myself (out loud or in my head) to work through difficult situations.

Self-talk: I try to mentally evaluate the accuracy of my own beliefs about situations I am having problems with.

Evaluating beliefs and assumptions: I think about my own beliefs and assumptions whenever I encounter a difficult situation.

Improving Performance by Employee Engagement

The 2010 International Journal of Business and Management defines employee engagement as: “The employee’s willingness and ability to help your company succeed, by providing discretionary effort on a sustainable basis.”

What we want to do is to enhance employee engagement by means of self-leadership. Therefore, managers should observe the following procedure:

Start it on day one

Start it from the top

Enhance employee engagement through two-way communication

Give satisfactory opportunities for development and advancement

Ensure that employees have everything they need to do their jobs

Give employees appropriate training

Have strong feedback system

Incentives

The Concept of Excellence

Self-leadership should lead to excellence. “Excellent” means being superior or being first class. You would think that everyone would want to become excellent. But this is not so. Many Filipinos are happy with “okay na” or “puwede na yan.” Sociologists might say that our colonization made us feel inferior as a culture. Economists might say that our lack of pride as a people is connected to our poverty and slow economic growth. Psychologists might say that unlike parents in other cultures, Filipino parents do not really push their children to achieve. Managers may say that the pressure from peers not to excel make employees content to perform like the rest. Perhaps, it is because of all these reasons that many of our organizations have a culture of mediocrity.

Yet we know that with globalization and ASEAN 2015, our organizations will be forced to compete with organizations from other countries who are hungrier, who have a stronger drive to achieve, and who have a stronger will to excel. If we do not step up, what will happen to us? We will be bought out by larger organizations and become slaves in a different form of colonization – an economic colonization that means we will forever become employees and subordinates of other nations.

Notwithstanding our history and economic condition, can we change our culture? Yes, if we concentrate on certain self-leadership practices. First, we must communicate. If we expect excellence, then we need to clearly articulate this when we hire people, in our company values, in our policies, in our goals. At the same time, people need to be evaluated and rewarded for excellence. We should not reward a person with a bonus because he did his job; instead, we should reward people who really excel. At the same time, we need to align our systems and structures to excellence. We should stop hiring people just because we like them. We should also not be afraid of hiring people who are better than us, because if we lead them well, they will make us and our organization better.
We need to promote people not just based on seniority, but based on excellence. Hence, we need training for values. We need to continually train people to become excellent, because the world is fast-changing and an excellent worker today can become obsolete tomorrow. We need to engage and empower our people in the pursuit of excellence, because our leaders, no matter how bright they are, do not have a monopoly of good or new ideas.

Finally, we must practice role modeling. In a country with high power distance, we have a high respect for leaders. Sadly, maybe too high, that we wait to see how our leaders behave before we follow suit. However, this is both an opportunity and a challenge for us leaders – to walk our talk and show people how to be excellent.

Then again, this requires us to practice self-leadership. If we expect our subordinates and peers to be excellent, it should be something that we expect from and demonstrate ourselves, even when we are tired, or discouraged, or afraid, or when no one is egging us, because the person who continually seeks to be excellent every single moment is the person who has self-leadership. Look at Mahatma Gandhi – he did not have formal power, he did not have a loud voice, he was frail looking and did not have an imposing physique. He simply was the change he wished to see and soon others took notice and began following him.

So I leave you today with these two challenges – practice self-leadership and be excellent. Maynilad needs that of you and more importantly, because the country needs that of Maynilad. As the poet wrote:

God Moves in Mysterious Ways
God moves in a mysterious way
His wonders to perform;
He plants His footsteps in the sea,
And rides upon the storm.

Deep in an unfathomable mines,
Of never-failing skill,
He treasures up His bright designs
And works His sovereign will.

]]>http://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/2015/03/25/self-leadership-and-excellence/feed/0WILL THE 2016 CANDIDATES COMMIT PLUNDER?http://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/2014/12/03/will-the-2016-candidates-commit-plunder/
http://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/2014/12/03/will-the-2016-candidates-commit-plunder/#commentsWed, 03 Dec 2014 10:20:29 +0000http://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/?p=2226By SENATOR MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO(Speech delivered at the PILLARS Lecture Series Year 3 sponsored by the Junior Public Relations Practitioners of the Philippines of the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila on 27 November 2014, at the university gym.)

Causes of Corruption
By the end of this year, we shall enter into the campaign period for the 2016 elections. With so many pending cases for plunder and corruption against high-profile political leaders, common sense dictates that as scholars, we need to examine the culture of corruption: its sources, its mind-sets, and whether the candidates we vote for might present a profile of corruption as a work in progress.

It will surprise you to know that in the entire Asia, one country has the highest number of anti-corruption measures – this country is the Philippines. And yet, according to the 2013 Corruption Perception Index, among 177 countries, the Philippines is ranked No. 94. The Philippines was among the first countries to ratify the United Nations Convention Against Corruption in 2006. Yet, it has been estimated that the Philippine economy losses at least 20 percent of our annual national budget to corruption. Naturally, corruption limits the ability of public officials to improve the economy with the use of foreign aid.

According to one expert, there are at least four sources of corruption. The first source of corruption is vicarious learning, during which people follow the examples of their leaders. The second source is what psychiatrists call the principle of desensitization, meaning that plunder starts with small cases of graft. Once you begin to accept petty corruption, you become desensitized to it. This source should make us reflect and strive to show integrity even in the most simple things.

The third source of corruption is rationalization, meaning that people justify their behavior in ways such as the following:

Depersonalization, by saying that “victims deserve corruption.”

Selective weighting, by saying “I am not so bad.”

Dire need, by saying “the end justifies the means.” Or

The metaphor of the ledger, by saying “my good works offset corrupt acts.”

The fourth source of corruption is learned helplessness, which happens when an honest person enters government but becomes socialized to perform and accept the corrupt practices. For example, members of Congress will eventually discover that they can gather more power for themselves by cutting illegal deals. This learned helplessness is aggravated by the lack of reinforcement.

Public officials in our country, both at the national and the local levels, engage in corruption because our anti-corruption laws so far in most cases are not actually implemented, and those who are guilty are not punished as they deserve. A study made by an expert showed that Filipinos believe corruption is difficult to eradicate, precisely because it is those in power who engage in it, or because the problem is too deeply rooted to change.

Corrupt Personality Traits
Let us examine the personalities of certain people who this early are already mentioned as potential candidates for president, vice-president, senator, or local government officials. How can we tell whether the candidate will likely commit plunder and corruption if elected to office? We should watch out for the following personality traits:

Watch out for the trait of Machiavellianism. This refers to a mind-set characterized by manipulation and the need for power.

Watch out for the trait of narcissism, which refers to an inflated sense of self-importance and grandiosity;

Watch out for subclinical psychopathy, which results from an aggregate of maladaptive trait deficits linked to antisocial deviance.

Watch out for weak moral identity and primitive moral thinking as exhibited by the candidate who values personal loyalty over formal rules and does not distinguish between organizational and personal goals.

In short, let me summarize the character traits of candidates prone to plunder:

Highly neurotic individuals

Future orientation

Power distance

Masculinity

Uncertainty avoidance

Social dominance orientation

Moral disengagement, which is defined as the propensity of the individual to evoke cognitions which restructure one’s actions to appear less harmful, minimize one’s understanding or responsibility for one’s action, or attenuate the perception of the distress one causes others. Sometimes this person commits an act of corruption by morally disengaging himself from the corruption by justifying the act using palliative comparisons. For example, the person linked to plunder will continue to receive kickbacks, on the reasoning that the kickback is very little compared with earnings of a convicted plunderer. Another method to assuage the conscience is to avoid using the word “bribe” and using euphemistic labels such as padulas or pameryenda.

The most notorious act of plunder in our country is the abuse of the pork barrel system. If you hear a candidate saying certain things, you can be sure he will commit plunder if given the opportunity. The potential plunderer will likely say things such as:

This is a legitimate government process of long-standing.

The consequences are minimal and my practice will speed up and directly deliver services to my constituents.

I am not abusing the people’s money but I am using what is due to me and intended to be distributed among my constituents.
These examples show that the corrupt public official negates the shared rules and norms of the social culture.

How to Choose the President
It is unfair to generalize by saying that people in developing countries like the Philippines are more likely prone to corruption than in developed countries. The truth of the matter is that corruption is more widespread in developing economies simply because of poverty, low public sector salaries, little accountability, and poorly enacted laws and principles of ethics. Notwithstanding the plethora of laws passed by the Philippines against corruption, it has become institutionalized and accepted.

Corruption in our country is not necessarily associated with the conscious intent to be unethical or immoral. Rather, corruption is schematic, because it has become a routine practice in the conduct of daily business. This is why it is of the utmost importance to choose the best possible president and other national officials in the 2016 elections. Many studies show that one of the most critical aspects of culture is the moral tone and examples set by leadership. Unfortunately, unethical leaders tend to attract more attention than an ethical one, and unethical leaders tend to influence employee behaviour.

As members of the educated sector of society, it is your duty to examine with logic and reason the various candidates who will present themselves. Authorities say that when we give power to good people, they are more able than others to enact moral identity, meaning do what is right. The best way to identify the best president is to develop a sense of moral identity – meaning the degree to which you think it is important to your sense of self to be caring, compassionate, fair, generous, etc., shaped by your response to feelings of power.

It is an axiom that power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. But this is not the entirely correct. Power does not corrupt; it heightens pre-existing ethical tendencies. Therefore, you must examine every candidate and ensure that he or she is equipped with a record of academic excellence, professional excellence, and achievements recognized on the national level or even international level. It is the character and political will of the next president that will determine whether we can rise to the challenge of the day, and take the following action:

We should provide more protection for whistleblowers.

We should grant more transparency and access to information.

We should strengthen our weak political party systems.

We should reduce the involvement of politicians in appointment systems.

We should reduce the excessive power of the executive branch.

We need to rationalize government bureaucracy.

We need to raise wages of those in government.

We need to improve enforcement, investigatory, and prosecution ability of law-enforcement agencies.

Conclusion
Is there something that you can do as an individual? Definitely, yes. Here are the ways by which you can shape popular communication to help combat the culture of corruption:

Highlight role models and those who fight against corruption in order to counteract stereotypes, instead of simply managing the public images of politicians;

Help educate the Filipino voter on the character of candidates and ensure they select those with integrity and political will;

Advocate for reform in our systems and structures through media in general, and in social media in particular.

At the same time that we have to prepare ourselves for the great battle for good government that looms with the 2016 elections, in the end it is always good to call on God’s protection.

In the words of the poet:

May the road rise to meet you.

May the wind ever be at your back.

May the Good Lord keep you
in the hollow of His hand.

May your heart be as warm
as your hearthstone.

And when you come to die
may the wail of the poor
be the only sorrow
you’ll leave behind.

The layman wants to know two things about the 2015 budget. The first question is: In the form of so-called savings, can the President still transfer an appropriation from one agency to another? The answer is yes. The second question is: Does the 2015 budget still contain pork barrel, meaning lump-sum funds to be spent at the discretion of the legislators? The second answer is also yes. In other words, the 2015 budget which contains two dangerous minefields leading to corruption, is not what people expect. It is what administration candidates expect. What this Senate should do in order to meet citizen expectation will be listed at the end of this speech.

Definition of “Savings” Unconstitutional

The Constitution uses the term “savings,” without defining it. We all know that this function is left for the Supreme Court to discharge. The Constitution provides: “No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriation; however, (certain officials) may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.”

If a legal term is left undefined, it is used in the ordinary sense, not the technical sense. In its ordinary sense, the term “savings” means sums of money saved on a regular basis, often by means of economizing. However, the 2015 budget invents its own definition of savings in Sections 67 to 70, particularly Section 68, which provides that savings can be declared at any time for whatever might be considered “justifiable reasons.”

Let me compare the 2011 budget with the 2015 budget to show how lax the definition of savings has become. In the 2011 budget, Section 69 gave the meaning of savings and augmentation as follows: “Savings refer to portions or balances . . . which are (i) still available after the cancellation or final discontinuance or abandonment of the work, activity, or purpose for which the appropriation is authorized. . . .”

Compare the 2011 definition with this definition in the 2015 budget, where Section 68 provides: “Savings refer to the portions or balances . . . from any of the following: and I paraphrase: “(a) discontinuance or abandonment of the program, activity, or project . . . which would render it not possible for the agency to implement the said P/A/P at anytime.” Again I paraphrase: Savings is “non-commencement of the P/A/P within the first semester of 2015.”

To summarize, the use of savings under the 2015 budget is broader. The old definition referred to final discontinuance or abandonment. The new definition refers to discontinuance or abandonment at any time.

As a humble student of constitutional law, allow me to observe that the new definition is unconstitutional for being over-broad and for being vague. Under the overbreadth doctrine, if a statute is so broadly written that it deters free expression, it can be struck down on its face because of its chilling effect. Here what we seek to protect is not freedom of expression, but the congressional power of the purse. Under the void for vagueness doctrine, a criminal statute is required to state explicitly and definitely what acts are prohibited or restricted. Here the vagueness doctrine seeks to preclude arbitrary enforcement by the executive branch of the spending power given to Congress.

There are two cases of dangerous minefields in this budget.

First Case: The use of savings under the new definition is broader. The use of savings under the old definition talks of final discontinuance or abandonment of the work, activity, or purpose for which the appropriation is authorized. The new definition talks simply of discontinuance or abandonment at any time (it could be during the first month, first quarter, first half). A deferral of a project can be construed as discontinuance or abandonment; the same project may be resubmitted for congressional authorization next year or two years from now. This contravenes the constitutional mandate of Congress to authorize appropriations but may later be declared by the DBM Secretary as abandoned, at its whims and caprices, and then he may use the appropriations for another project which has not been previously authorized by Congress but which falls within the more general P/A/P.

Second Case: After the first semester (two quarters), an agency that fails to obligate any allotment in its own budget loses it. What the agency loses, Secretary Abad gains. What happens to the agency heads’ commitment to Congress that they will deliver a specified level of outputs (number of school buildings, completion rate, kilometers of roads, linear meters of bridges and so on)? What if Projects X, Y, and Z were funded out of “savings” but were substituted for Congress-authorized but DBM-discontinued projects A, B, and C, would that not violate the power of Congress to authorize appropriations consistent with the recent Supreme Court decision on DAP? What if X, Y, and Z are entirely new projects? How would the general public know that such substitution took place? Monitoring of projects will be extremely difficult which may open up opportunities for corruption.

Pork Barrel Remains

In the 2014 budget, the term PDAF was conspicuously avoided. But the non-appearance of the term PDAF was merely illusory, the P25.4 billion worth of pork transferred to five agencies with legislators still in control of the projects. The same thing is happening in the 2015 budget.

Let me raise a BIG question about the 2015 budget. Last summer, why were representatives asked to submit lists of projects they endorsed for their districts? I understand that the form distributed did not bear any letterhead.

In the 2015 budget, no less than P37.3 billion worth of projects are allocated to the following agencies:

Reportedly, the Department of Budget and Management submitted to the House of Representatives alleged errata consisting of 269 pages and composed of additions, realignments, insertions, and typographical errors, in all amounting to P4.7 billion, consisting of, among others:

P3.87 billion for the APEC Conference
P998.8 million for the Bureau of Customs
P296.9 million for the Department of Tourism
The 269 pages of errata are solid proof that DBM has been haphazard with the budget.

Recommendations

Retain the original definition of savings. Sections 68-69 prescribe the use of savings, meaning of savings and augmentation, and priority in the use of savings. The insertion of the phrase “at any time” in section 68(a) totally changes the meaning of the word “savings”. Savings does not happen “at any time”, it happens under conditions described in the original meaning of savings, as stated in the general provisions.

Section 68(b) on the matter of non-commencement of a program, activity, or project (P/A/P) within one semester constitutes another change in the original meaning of savings. It drastically cuts short the period during which savings can be rationally declared. Savings are usually declared toward the end of the year, not at the middle.

The redefinition of savings demolishes and overturns not only the constitutional and legislated meaning of savings; it goes against the generally accepted meaning of the word itself. We might be the only country in this world which declares savings “at any time” and “non-commencement within six months”. Since the private sector has a different meaning of savings, books on accounting, auditing, and financial management will have to be changed.

There will be confusion between the private sector and the public sector in the Philippines; there will also be confusion with other countries because
their definition will be the standard definition and ours is the result of an effort to take over the power of the purse.

The most important reason is to save Congress’ power of the purse. Through the years, Congress’ power of the purse has been steadily eroded, diminished, and reduced – all with the consent and cooperation of Congress. Whatever is left has to be saved.

Senate should not approve the budget unless the offensive redefinitions are removed.

Because of the importance and significance of the issue of redefinition of savings, senators should explain their votes so the public can be guided in 2016.

In the Lower House, only those who were opposed to the redefinition of savings and the GAB 2015 explained their votes. Those who will say “yes” in the Senate should also explain why they will shoot themselves, not only in the foot, but also in the heart. They have to explain why they will commit an act which is inimical to their own institution.

The Senate should also compel government agencies to comply with the reportorial requirements in Section 91 of the general provisions, especially the second paragraph, which requires DBM to report on lump sums. So far, DBM has not been complying with this requirement.

Put the P2,690,684,000 appropriations for the socio-economic component of the normalization process for DA, DepEd, CHED, DOH, DSWD, TESDA, and OPPAP to the Unprogrammed Appropriations. Reason: It has no legal basis. The BBL has yet to pass Congress, and even if passed into law, has to be ratified in a plebiscite spanning the area of ARMM and nearby regions.

DILG should focus on its mandates which are: to supervise local government units and to secure the life and property of every Filipino, no matter where they live, in urban centers or rural areas, and no matter what their political colors are, whether they are friends or foes.

Restrict the use of savings from Special Purpose Funds, especially the Miscellaneous Personnel Benefits Fund (MPBF) and the Pension and Gratuity Fund (PGF). DBM might have bloated the budget for the MPBF and the PGF with the intention of using the ‘fat’ as a source for additional discretionary spending.

Juan Martin Flavier was my best friend in the Senate, and possibly the most honest senator I knew.

He was born in Tondo, Manila but grew up in Baguio. He was a bright student and graduated valedictorian in both grade school and high school. He graduated Bachelor of Science from the University of the Philippines and placed at the top of his class, thus qualifying him as a member of the Phi Kappa Phi International Honor Society. In addition, he was admitted as a member of the Alpha Epsilon Delta international honor society for the advancement of research.

Subsequently, he graduated Doctor of Medicine also at the University of the Philippines. Naturally he trained at U.P. Philippine General Hospital, where he was named outstanding intern. Some nine years later, he earned the degree Masters in Public Health at the Johns Hopkins University in the United States.

Sen. Juan Flavier served as doctor to the barrios in Nueva Ecija and Cavite. He was recognized and rewarded with his appointment as president of the Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement, and a year later as president of the International Institute of Rural Reconstruction. It did not come as a surprise that the Philippine Jaycees gave him the Award for TOYM (or Ten Outstanding Young Men). The U.P. Alumni Association followed suit by naming him as Most Distinguished Alumnus.

In a much-applauded move, in 1992 he was appointed health secretary. Sec. Flavier launched public health programs that captivated the public with his catchy, media-savvy slogans. His American alma mater recognized his achievements as a Filipino public servant by awarding him a gold medal for marked distinction in public health.

On the strength of his rock-star status, he won as senator in the 1995 elections. In all, he served two terms. He endeared himself to all committee chairs when they needed another senator to form the quorum of two senators for a public hearing. No matter what the committee or subject was, the genial Sen. Flavier made himself available every single day of the week for a quorum, as if it was his duty.

Johnny and I were both neophyte senators in the same year. Hardly had the dust settled from the campaign, when I rose in a privilege speech to denounce pork barrel kickbacks, which in that simpler time consisted of 10 percent of the public funds involved. I heatedly said that right after I was proclaimed senator, a series of contractors asked for appointments. I had just been named laureate of the Magsaysay Award for Government Service, with a citation “for bold and moral leadership in cleaning up a graft-ridden government agency.”

Despite my highly publicized Asian award for honesty, the individual contractors minced no words. Their offers were the same: if I turned over my pork barrel funds, they would build the public works project, take care of the incidental bribes that were part of the process, and guarantee that I would receive a 10-percent kickback. I would not need to sign anything – as some of them said: “Malinis ang kikitain.”

I was so insulted and outraged that I rushed to the Senate to denounce the system, expecting that my colleagues would leap to their feet and confirm my narrative. But, foolish me, after my speech there was no interpellation and no comment from anybody. Nobody spoke. Except for one man – Sen. Juan Flavier. With an offended expression, he rose to affirm my accusation of corruption in the Senate. If Sen. Flavier did not have the courage and the purity of heart to support my story of corruption, I would have made no impact. Because of Sen. Flavier’s comment, the media picked up the story.

When I was sometimes tired or bored or downhearted, I would saunter to Johnny’s desk and engage him in a chat, confident that I was sharing a companionable time with an honest man; a good man; a great man.

In conclusion, since Juan Martin Flavier was a scholarly man who sought knowledge from universities abroad, allow me to quote from the poem entitled “Dominus Illuminatio Mea,” the Oxford motto which means “God be my light:”

In the hour of death, after this life’s whim,
When the heart beats low, and the eyes grow dim,
And pain has exhausted every limb –
The lover of the Lord shall trust in Him.